net of all associated costs of both the users and 

 others in using or providing these resources and re- 

 lated sen/ices. Agencies will be encouraged, 

 through review procedures, demonstration projects, 

 and educational workshops, to adopt the TCM and 

 CVM techniques for project evaluations that would 

 otherwise have used UDVs. As agencies gradually 

 adopt CVM and TCM and develop a nnore compre- 

 hensive set of regional models, reliance on the 

 UDV can be expected to diminish. 



(b) Estimating use in the UDV method. (1) Using 

 the ranges of values requires the study of esti- 

 mates of annual use foregone and expected at rec- 

 reation sites. Use can be estimated by a use esti- 

 mating equation or per capita use curve as dis- 

 cussed above, but when these means are availa- 

 ble, the second step of the travel cost method 

 should generally be used instead of UDVs to derive 

 the benefit. 



(2) The capacity method is an alternative method 

 of estimating use, but it has severe limitations. The 

 capacity procedure involves the estimation of 

 annual recreation use under without-project and 

 with-project conditions through the determination of 

 resource or facility capacities (taking into considera- 

 tion instantaneous rates of use, turnover rates, and 

 weekly and seasonal patterns of use). Seasonal 

 use patterns are dependent on climate and culture 

 and probably account for the greatest variation in 

 use estimates derived through this method. In gen- 

 eral, annual use of outdoor recreation areas, par- 

 ticularly in rural locations and in areas with pro- 

 nounced seasonal variation, is usually about 50 

 times the design load, which is the number of visi- 

 tors to a recreation area or site on an average 

 summer Sunday. In very inaccessible areas and in 

 those known for more restricted seasonal use, the 

 multiplier would be less; in urban settings or in 

 areas with less pronounced seasonal use patterns, 

 the multiplier would be greater. In any case, the 

 actual estimation of use involves an analytical pro- 

 cedure using instantaneous capacities, daily turn- 

 over rates, and weekly and seasonal use patterns 

 as specific data inputs. 



(3) Because the capacity method does not in- 

 volve the estimation of site-specific demand, its use 

 is valid only when it has been otherwise determined 

 that sufficient demand exists in the market area of 

 project alternatives to accommodate the calculated 

 capacity. Its greatest potential is therefore in urban 

 settings where sufficient demand obviously exists. 

 Additionally, its use should be limited to small pro- 

 jects with (i) a facility orientation (as opposed to a 

 resource attraction), and (ii) restricted market areas 

 that would tend to make the use of alternative use 

 estimating procedures less useful or efficient. 



(c) Calculating values. The estimates of annual 

 use are combined with the selected unit day values 

 to get an estimate of annual recreation benefits. 

 The value assigned to each activity or category of 

 activities is multiplied by the number of recreation 

 days estimated for that activity. The products are 

 then summed to obtain the estimate of the total 

 value of an alternative. Recreation days to be 

 gained and lost or foregone as a result of a particu- 

 lar alternative are listed and valuated separately, 

 not merely shown as net recreation days. Transfers 

 of recreational users to or from existing sites in the 

 region must be calculated, and the net regional 

 gain or loss used in the final benefit estimated. 

 Adequate information must appear in the discus- 

 sion of the use estimation and valuation procedure 

 or elsewhere in the report concerning the alterna- 

 tive being considered, so that the reader can derive 

 a similar value for each activity. 



Section IX— NED Benefit Evaluation 

 Procedure: Commercial Fishing 



2.9.1 Introduction. 



This section provides procedural guidance for the 

 evaluation of the national economic development 

 (NED) benefits of water and related land resources 

 plans to commercial fishing. These procedures 

 apply to marine, estuarine, and fresh water com- 

 mercial fisheries for both fish and shellfish. 



2.9.2 Conceptual basis. 



(a) The NED benefits are conceptually meas- 

 ured as the change in consumers' and producers' 

 surplus as a result of a plan. However, since proper 

 measurement of these quantities ordinarily requires 

 estimates of supply and demand elasticities, rea- 

 sonable approximations may be obtained by the fol- 

 lowing methods: 



(1) When no change in aggregate fish catch is 

 expected as a result of a plan (perhaps because of 

 an effective quota system), NED benefits may be 

 measured as cost savings to existing fish harvests. 



(2) When the fish catch is projected to change as 

 a result of a plan, but the change is too small to 

 affect market prices, a seasonally-weighted aver- 

 age of recent pnces may be used to value the with- 

 out- and with-plan harvests. In this case, it may be 

 convenient for computational purposes to break the 

 total change in income into two parts: (I) the cost 

 savings for the existing (without-plan) catch; and (ii) 

 the change in net income associated with the incre- 

 mental catch. This latter part may be measured as 



87 



